Fulbourn Neighbourhood Plan - submission version

Representation ID: 59350

Received: 17/01/2022

Respondent: South Cambridgeshire District Council

Representation Summary:

Policy FUL/04 Protection and Enhancement of Natural Features.
Part 2c – Mention could be made in the supporting text to this policy to highlight the Local Plan Policy SS/8 Sustainable Drainage Systems. Currently this criterion has no supporting text to explain why it is included in a policy.

Part 3 – We had previously asked for justification to be included in the supporting text as to why this section of the policy relates only to new developments of 10 units or more The NPPF defines a major housing site as being of ten or more or a site with an area greater than 0.5 hectares. We were concerned that the policy needed to be more flexible so that it takes into account if a developer submits a scheme for 9 dwellings and then a subsequent scheme for 8 which is equivalent to over 10 but not covered by your policy. We would suggest that the Policy would be clearer if the first line made reference to 0.5 hectares as well as 10 dwellings.

Part 3a – How does this link to the new policy FUL /03 that creates the Green Infrastructure? In the Regulation 14 version of the Plan this was the only element asking developers to contribute to a green infrastructure which had not been shown on a map. Habitat to promote a net gain in biodiversity is within FUL/03 1c – is this duplicating?

Part 3b – As with Part 3a of this policy it is unclear how this relates to the new policy FUL/03. Are the new areas of ‘Natural Greenspace’ those that are identified in Figures 11 and 12? Are these greenspaces formed as part of the development or is there an expectation for off-site contributions? There is no explanation in the supporting text as to what is meant by ‘Natural England’s definition of ‘Accessible Natural Greenspace’. On Figures 11and 12 these ‘new habitats’ are outside the built area of the village where development of any scale would not be expected to take place.

It is suggested that the supporting text makes reference to the document ‘Understanding the relevance and application of the Access to Natural Green Space Standard’ Natural England 2008. This updates information about the promotion and delivery of accessible nature green space. The English Nature report 153 is from the 1990s.

Part 3c – As noted in relation to our comments on Policy FUL/04, developers can only be asked to mitigate for losses outside their site (i.e. in the Parish) through a Section 106 Planning Obligation and where the Government rules can be met. They must be:
• necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms;
• directly related to the development; and
• fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the development.

It should be noted that it will be possible to deliver Biodiversity Net Gain offsite outside the parish boundary if it contributes to strategic ecological networks or the Nature Recovery Network (yet to be drafted as an outcome of the Environment Act). Guidance on this is currently being drafted.

Part 3d - How would this criterion be achieved? Who would be able to test that the drainage patterns would not be compromised? How would a developer demonstrate this? Suggest it should state that proposals should be supported by supporting evidence that demonstrates that the existing drainage patterns will not be compromised. The supporting text could set out the parameters for what should be submitted.

Part 4 - It is unclear who would be responsible for monitoring the legal agreements to achieve this part of the policy. These can only be associated with a planning consent and therefore the policy should state "appropriate legal agreements associated with a planning consent."